The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor
of a scientific journal.
"A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides
clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of
stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an
encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to
twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased
activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce
relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the
return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during
pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did
those who had had several offspring."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more
alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain
how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the
argument.
Answer :
The main
conclusions that have been incurred by the author are that the order of birth
is the deciding factor for the activeness of a monkey. The author had made some
sweeping generalizations . He needs to take some dialectical approach in order to
make his argument more trust worthy. I find some of these facts must have been
told to make the argument more plausible .
Firstly,
the origin of the rhesus monkeys have not been specified. The study may show
different results for a monkey in captivity and a monkey observed in the wild.
Since he has not mentioned anywhere about this , it seems seemingly difficult
to analyze the study and generalize the mote argument.
Secondly,
the author mainly weighs his opinion on the observation that in stimulating
situations the monkeys showed greater levels of hormone cortisol. He/She never
mentioned the activity levels in normal situations ,i.e did the monkeys have
the same production of the hormone or they had distinction here also.
Thirdly
, the author makes a sensational statement that humans also produce relatively
high cortisol in simulating situations, though no proper proof in support of
his argument like conducting a study or research on humans had been mentioned.
In the
last sentence ,the author states that the levels of cortisol were higher in the
monkeys which were first time pregnant ,but the author fails to provide us the
data of how much more is the level of hormone cortisol.
Thus, if
the author had provided us with the above credentials , the argument would have
been more plausible. Since, he failed to provide us with the above details, it does
not look like a cogent argument .
